Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Trek's latest tease....thoughts? [mpquick] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mpquick wrote:
xeon wrote:
my Garmin had me a little under 40mph.


I think an important qualifier to this study is that the tests were done at 4.8 and 6.2 m/s (~11 and 14 mph). This is likely to be significantly different from the speeds and consequently forces that would be experienced in a crash by the population here.

If you assume that your head undertakes exactly zero negative acceleration prior to impact. E.g. the surprise car door at full speed with your head hitting first.

But I'd imagine most head strikes aren't like that. I speculate pretty good at doing gymnastics in mid-crash to not take direct headers. All the broken collarbones being an indicator that our limbs often make first contact.

But that's part of the vast amount of stuff we don't know, probably.
Quote Reply
Re: Trek's latest tease....thoughts? [Mitch@Trek] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Mitch@Trek - Please check your personal messages on here.

Shane Miller - GPLama
Web | Twitter | Instagram | Facebook | Strava | YouTube
Last edited by: gplama: Mar 23, 19 5:01
Quote Reply
Re: Trek's latest tease....thoughts? [mpquick] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
My MIPS helmet didn't stop me from getting a concussion when I also broke my clavicle due to the forces of impact. Was it less severe? I have no idea. But I still had a noggin, so I'm good with that.

Rugby Media Dude-earfulofdirt.com

Hooker training for the Sport of Scrum-Halves [Triathlon]
Quote Reply
Re: Trek's latest tease....thoughts? [ggeiger] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hello ggeiger and All,

https://www.outsideonline.com/...l-helmet-controversy

Excerpt:

[Turns out, it was a new kind of helmet. The brand’s four new lids combine conventional EPS foam with a new low-density, latticelike structure called WaveCel, which both compresses and shears laterally on impact to protect the brain. Along with the WaveCel-equipped helmets, which are now available, Trek released a study by the researchers who invented the technology. The study claims to show that WaveCel was up to 48 times more effective at preventing concussions than helmets with just standard EPS foam.

Some competitors were nonplussed by the bold safety pronouncements. MIPS, a company whose technology essentially popularized awareness of the role of rotational energy in brain injuries (and offered its own solution), responded by saying that MIPS was “unable to replicate” Trek’s performance claims in its own testing. (Trek’s headline claim failed to mention that the same testing also showed that systems like MIPS lowered the risk of concussion, if not as much as WaveCel.) A week after Trek unveiled WaveCel, Koroyd, which makes its own low-density cellular structure for use in sports helmets and other protective gear, issued a press release running down Trek’s claims and asked if Trek had been “carried away by a wave of hype.”

Faced with the Trek-said, MIPS/Koroyd-said spat, what are cyclists to make of the claims on each side? It’s a little hard to say at this point, but some context helps at least frame the issues and understand why this is such a contentious topic.]

Cheers, Neal

+1 mph Faster
Quote Reply
Re: Trek's latest tease....thoughts? [nealhe] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
nealhe wrote:
Hello ggeiger and All,

https://www.outsideonline.com/...l-helmet-controversy

Excerpt:

[Turns out, it was a new kind of helmet. The brand’s four new lids combine conventional EPS foam with a new low-density, latticelike structure called WaveCel, which both compresses and shears laterally on impact to protect the brain. Along with the WaveCel-equipped helmets, which are now available, Trek released a study by the researchers who invented the technology. The study claims to show that WaveCel was up to 48 times more effective at preventing concussions than helmets with just standard EPS foam.

Some competitors were nonplussed by the bold safety pronouncements. MIPS, a company whose technology essentially popularized awareness of the role of rotational energy in brain injuries (and offered its own solution), responded by saying that MIPS was “unable to replicate” Trek’s performance claims in its own testing. (Trek’s headline claim failed to mention that the same testing also showed that systems like MIPS lowered the risk of concussion, if not as much as WaveCel.) A week after Trek unveiled WaveCel, Koroyd, which makes its own low-density cellular structure for use in sports helmets and other protective gear, issued a press release running down Trek’s claims and asked if Trek had been “carried away by a wave of hype.”

Faced with the Trek-said, MIPS/Koroyd-said spat, what are cyclists to make of the claims on each side? It’s a little hard to say at this point, but some context helps at least frame the issues and understand why this is such a contentious topic.]

Sadly, Trek seems to be marketers foremost lately. IMO they tried to be cute to cause a buzz and now they have to deal with the backlash. Not the first time for them. They seem to have gone the same way as Apple.
Quote Reply

Prev Next